Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

POLL? Who's the villain in the Terri Schiavo case?
PHX news | 3/24/05 | AZ Righty

Posted on 03/24/2005 11:50:52 AM PST by AZ Righty

Who's the villain in the Terri Schiavo case?

(49%) Her husband

(24%) The government

(14%) Her parents

(12%) The media


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: clintonjudges; evildoers; schiavo; terri; terrischiavo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 461-478 next last
To: smokeyb

Im Catholic and I want to be cremated... My mother was catholic and she was cremated...


201 posted on 03/24/2005 12:44:43 PM PST by The Hollywood Conservative (I can't even make a tagline because I'm a GIANT IDIOT!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
Endeavored to interfere with the independence of the local judiciary in a Florida County to make a grandstand play to an emotionally driven faction. In that action, they acted outside of the tasks given them in the Constitution. As I posted on the internet, earlier in the week:

This past weekend, what was left of honor and decency in the Republican Party, as reflected in its Congressional delegations, perished. Every protestation of concern for the principles of Federalism, for the Constitutional limitations on the power of Government, for the dignity of Man, was reduced to a lie, far more egregious than one of the many offered by the former President.

The Democrats are, of course, no better. And rather than, themselves, actually face the issue in the Schiavo case, head on, are claiming that injecting it into Congress, is intended as a distraction from the tragic course, continuing in Iraq. Enough!

No Gentlemen, this is not a distraction from the War. This is about something far more contemptible than merely an intended distraction. This is using a poor, unfortunate human body, with some reflexes, but little else still intact, to demonstrate arrogant power, in order to appear to be championing the dignity of life, while actually doing the exact and precise opposite.

Our Founding Fathers understood the principle here, when they charged the British Government repeatedly with interfering with the independence of the local judiciary, in the list of grievances that led to the Revolution. If you are not aware of that, please go and read the Declaration of Independence: Declaration. You surely owe America that much.

The action of Congress in creating a special appeal, applicable to a case, the import of which is clearly limited to the personal heartache, not public policy, is a naked show of power--usurped power, for you will not find it in the Constitution--to interfere with the local Floridean Courts deciding a family issue in Florida. It exceeds just about anything the British Government did to the Colonies to provoke a Revolution. But that is only one aspect of the outrage in progress.

There may, indeed, be a distraction here. But it is not from the War. If a distraction is intended, it is to divert Conservative criticism of the Administration and Congress for what they have not done; what they have failed to do, which they could have done Constitutionally, on issues which really do come under the umbrella of our Federal system--actions which could have freed the States to reassume the control they were supposed to retain under the Constitution, of the health, safety and morals, of their respective citizens.

Congress has no right to impose itself as some Board of Appellate review for State Courts. It certainly has no right to make medical decisions for American families. But it does have the right and duty to define the roles of the Federal Courts, save only for those few categories of cases, specifically entrusted to the Supreme Court, by the Constitution (see Article III). What this means is very simple:

Congress, if it were serious about limiting abortion, could stop the Federal Courts from hearing Abortion rights cases, tomorrow! Congress, if they were serious about the right to prayer in public schools and in State institutions--or seriously believed in the right to publicly display the Ten Commandments--could stop the Federal Courts that have been issuing injunctions against such observances, from hearing such cases, tomorrow. And if George W. Bush was one whit more honorable than William J. Clinton, he would have called upon them to do precisely that.

Understand then, the implications of what these grandstanding politicians have done, rather than what they could have done. Understand the fundamental intellectual dishonesty of these very immoral men--who will abuse a human body in the pursuit of power and publicity--and join your fellow citizens in a wave of denunciation that will shake the Beltway to its rotten core.

William Flax Attorney At Law (Lifelong Defender Of Constitutional Government)

202 posted on 03/24/2005 12:44:57 PM PST by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: angelanddevil2
"I think there was an attempt of murder.....

You think?

Have you gone to the authorities with your thoughts?

You may well turn this whole thing around.

203 posted on 03/24/2005 12:45:21 PM PST by G.Mason (The replies by this poster are meant for self-amusement only. Read at your own discretion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: G.Mason

Get real.
Vows were "Forsaking ALL OTHERS" etc etc etc.
If that means nothing, then his 'guardianship' means NOTHING.


204 posted on 03/24/2005 12:45:36 PM PST by Darksheare (Gravity - Fear = SPLAT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: G.Mason

Another words in your way of thinking it's only an intelligent conversation if your side or opinion is winning.


205 posted on 03/24/2005 12:46:09 PM PST by OKIEDOC (LL THE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: smokeyb
No Catholic would ever agree to cremation!

Another fallacy. While the Church prefers burial, they do allow the faithful to be cremated. The deceased then has a Memorial Mass instead of a Mass of Christian burial.

206 posted on 03/24/2005 12:46:42 PM PST by ContraryMary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: ContraryMary

According to the FBI 26% of female murder victims are killed by their husbands...


207 posted on 03/24/2005 12:46:43 PM PST by The Hollywood Conservative (I can't even make a tagline because I'm a GIANT IDIOT!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: AZ Righty
You are wrong. Her husband is the villain definitely, and the courts should never go on word of estranged husband's mouth, to starve her to death. Were it a life support issue that would be one thing. But it's not. She can even swallow, but for years the husband has not allowed her to even try.

The courts have nothing in writing which is what they need, to rule as they did.
208 posted on 03/24/2005 12:46:56 PM PST by gidget7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZ Righty
DO you have kids? Are they under your supervision?

Yes, and she's a minor. Different situation.

I find your viewpoint very callous.

209 posted on 03/24/2005 12:47:19 PM PST by Not A Snowbird (Official RKBA Landscaper and Arborist, Pajama Duchess of Green Leafy Things)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle
We would be fighting for her even if she was an atheist.

Well deserved PING!

210 posted on 03/24/2005 12:47:22 PM PST by frogjerk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: smokeyb
"May he burn in hell without food or water."

Burning in Hell is one thing, but no food or water?

What church do you go to?

211 posted on 03/24/2005 12:48:08 PM PST by G.Mason (The replies by this poster are meant for self-amusement only. Read at your own discretion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify
It does not matter what Terri wanted! She did not commit anything in writing and her guardian has made the decision. Do you understand that?

Using that convoluted logic, every severely mentally handicapped person can be systematically put to death.

Eugenics anyone??

212 posted on 03/24/2005 12:48:29 PM PST by bikepacker67 (#)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: The Hollywood Conservative

And how many homicides does that represent in one year? Compare that to the number of divorces in one year.


213 posted on 03/24/2005 12:48:37 PM PST by ContraryMary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: bikepacker67
OK, here's another number to reach jeb Bush's office: 850.488.5603. A live person just answered and was polite. PLEASE BE POLITE! We gain nothing by insulting Jeb Bush. Please call this number and calmly tell the person who answers that you are calling to implore Jeb Bush to take Terri into protective custody. Again, I just got through to a live person at 12:40pm Pac time.
214 posted on 03/24/2005 12:48:46 PM PST by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: AZ Righty

BUMP.


215 posted on 03/24/2005 12:49:15 PM PST by Constitution Day ("Please do not emanate into the penumbra.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify
he's the guardian!

Schiavo and the word guardian are antonyms...

216 posted on 03/24/2005 12:49:25 PM PST by frogjerk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: AZ Righty

How does putting someone to death equal privacy rights? I look forward to hearing that at the next murder trial.


217 posted on 03/24/2005 12:50:01 PM PST by KC_Conspirator (This space outsourced to India)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gidget7
"Were it a life support issue that would be one thing."

Educate yourself. It the stomach tube is life support.

218 posted on 03/24/2005 12:50:04 PM PST by G.Mason (The replies by this poster are meant for self-amusement only. Read at your own discretion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify

"If not the guardian, who?"

How about a guardian who isn't conflicted in his interests?


219 posted on 03/24/2005 12:50:17 PM PST by Badray (Quinn's First Law -- Liberalism ALWAYS generates the exact opposite of its stated intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: AZ Righty

I think you are wrong. As more evidence show, we will know what the husband's motives were.


220 posted on 03/24/2005 12:50:23 PM PST by jer33 3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 461-478 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson